BIG FAST AFFORDABLE EMISSIONS CUTS ARE WITHIN REACH, A STUDY OF EUROPE SHOWS

New study shows 40% emissions cuts possible in Europe; Fair solutions are financially and technically achievable, but political will is still required
December 1, 2009 (Friends of the Earth Europe)

SUMMARY
The debate about climate change has in recent months shifted from whether it is happening (it is) and whether humans are causing it (they are) to whether the developed nations can afford to do anything significant about it. A new study of Europe finds they certainly can.

Europe’s Share of the Climate Challenge; Domestic Actions and International Obligations to Protect the Planet, from the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), found the 27 EU countries can cut greenhouse gas emissions (GhGs) 40% below 1990 levels by 2020 and 90% by 2050 at a cost of 1.1%-to-3.3% of the projected 2020 EU GDP of €13.6 trillion. In comparison, the authoritative Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change found that doing nothing and waiting to deal with the impacts of climate change would likely cost 5%-to-20% of GDP.

click to enlarge

Europe’s efforts against global climate change, like the world’s, must focus on 2 areas: (1) Domestic actions to cut GhGs in the developed world through (a) “a dramatic shift” to New Energy (wind, solar, hydrokinetics, geothermal and biomass-based Combined Heat and Power) and (b) “radical improvements” in Energy Efficiency; and (2) International actions in the poor and most vulnerable places to (a) assist in the building of New Energy and Energy Efficiency, (b)interrupt ecosystem degradation and (c) mitigate the harms already done by early impacts.

click to enlarge

COMMENTARY
The SEI study assumed the potential of Europe to build New Energy (NE) and Energy Efficiency (EE) but assumed NO new nuclear reactors, the phasing OUT of present nuclear facilities and NO carbon capture and storage (CCS, or “clean” coal) for electricity generation. It also assumed NO AGROfuels. Nevertheless, it found Europe could build NE and EE rapidly enough to cut GhGs 40% by 2020 WITHOUT spending for emissions-cutting projects outside Europe (international offsets).

The study assessed Europe’s obligation to assist developing nations to transition to a low-GhG New Energy economy as a means of dealing with the climate crisis as well as a means of dealing with the equally critical development crisis in the poorest nations. It used the Greenhouse Development Rights framework as a basis to judge what would be Europe’s “fair” share. It concluded Europe should contribute between €150 billion and €450 billion in 2020, or 1.1%-to-3.3% of the projected 2020 EU GDP of €13.6 trillion.

click to enlarge

SEI made a 2-scenario study. One scenario was business-as-usual and one – the mitigation scenario – was designed to accomplish the pre-designated emissions reductions. The study used a LEAP modeling system common in energy policy assessments. In the interests of transparency, SEI included a discussion of LEAP in an annex of the paper and a link to the data.

The study balanced the roles of “sufficiency” and “equity” in the scenarios. Its mitigation scenario calculated for a "less materialistic" future in which GDP grows 1.6 times over through 2050, instead of the business-as-usual 1.8 times over, in order to bring all the 27 nations of the EU into the effort against climate change.

Assuming a major mobilization of EU nations to achieve the necessary emissions cuts, the paper nevertheless limits itself to a conservative approach, using only NE and EE that are already commercially available or in development and expected to be at commercial scale in the next 2-to-3 decades. Calculations were based on these NE and EE technologies' currently estimated economic potential. The study excluded the always-10-years-away hydrogen fuel cell and next generation bioenergy options.

click to enlarge

From 2010 to 2020, the incremental cost of the mitigation scenario (for households, services and transport, electric generation and avoided fuel) was estimated at ~€2 trillion, or ~2% of Europe’s 2010-to-2020 GDP, in line with other studies' 1%-to-3% estimates.

Re Buildings:
The mitigation scenario requires major GhG cuts in the buildings sector. It begins with aggressive (5% per year) retrofitting of existing homes and building “passive” (net zero energy) homes beginning in 2011. The goal is to make 90% of Europe’s housing passive by 2050. There are 2 significant needs: (1) Rigorous building performance standards must be extended throughout Europe; and (2) Capital must be made available both to homeowners to pay for the retrofits and to the businesses that will do the work to scale up and train workers.

click to enlarge

Re Industry:
Limited emissions reductions are the best that can be obtained in heavy industries. Steel, cement and chemicals – which are among the highest GhG-generators of Europe’s industries – will be instrumental and highly productive in building the NE and EE infrastructure that will achieve the emissions-reduction goals and cannot, at the same time, eliminate their emissions. Best practices will be the objective.

Other industrial subsectors can be expected to be more active in instituting biomass and combined heat and power (CHP) technologies that will move industry toward significant (14% in 2020 and 45% in 2050) emissions reductions.

click to enlarge

Re Transport
Transport of people and freight generates 32% of EU emissions at present and is growing the fastest. Dramatic shifts in habits and technologies will be necessary. Passengers must shift to rail from personal vehicles and air. 75% of current trips by personal vehicle must go down to 69% in 2020 and 43% in 2050. Travel distances also must be reduced. In 2020, hybrid electric vehicles will be 21% of the fleet and electric vehicles will be 2% but by 2050 almost all of the fleet will be battery electric vehicles.

Rail transport will go from 65% electric to fully electrified in 2030. By 2050, 65% of buses will be electric. Airplanes and ferries will be significantly more efficient. There will be more rail to transport goods and the “lorries” used will be 20% more efficient by 2020, 50% will be hybrid or electric, and there will be fewer of them.

click to enlarge

Re Agriculture and Non-energy sector emissions:
Land use sinks in Europe are likely to remain little changed. Net emissions can be reduced in cement, waste and agricultural land management practices.

Re Electric generation:
The mitigation scenario requires the early and complete phasing out of all coal and oil powered electricity generation. Natural gas would become a backup source of power generation. The mitigation scenario excluded nuclear, “clean” coal and only included sustainably-grown biomass used in conjunction with CHP-equipped plants. Primary generation would come from wind, solar, geothermal and hydrokinetic energies.

click to enlarge

Residential electricity demand grows 8% by 2020 and 14% by 2050. Industrial demand grows 12% by 2020 and 49% by 2050. The EU has more than ample New Energy to meet the demand, as well as the technologies to deal with variabilities and increase New Energy storage capacity.

Interestingly, the mitigation scenario sees Europe getting 7.5% of its power from solar energy captured in solar power plants in North Africa and transported via trans-Mediterranean cable.

click to enlarge

Re Combined Heat and Power (CHP):
CHP is at present a potential source of enormous Energy Efficiency and, by using power generation for both electricity and heat, can raise total plant efficiency to over 80% in power plants by 2050. Its use will be of most value during the transitional phase of the mitigation scenario in Poland and other Eastern European countries that are farther behind the West in the move away from fossil fuels. By 2050, CHP will be used exclusively with biomass to maximize productivity.

The result of the mitigation scenario is that European energy consumption is dramatically reduced and the desired GhG reductions (40% by 2020 and 90% by 2050) become available at the costs described above.

click to enlarge

The report’s conclusion makes an interesting observation. The choice to move to the mitigation scenario is not a choice that will occur “spontaneously” or be the result of empty “aspirational” programs. It will require leaders to lead and citizens to demand leadership of their leaders and point them in the right directions.

To turn the EU to policies and practices that will prevent this good earth’s average temperature from climbing over 2 degrees Celsius will also, as so many similar reports have predicted, take a mobilization similar to a war effort and involve a commitment from the entire economy.

Such an effort will need to involve all the nations in the EU and will require a “climate protection framework” to guarantee protections for the many and disparate participants.

click to enlarge

The cost, 1%-to-3% of EU GDP, is not trivial but it is far from prohibitive and, in fact, a bargain, given the costs of dealing with inaction.

The report reminds its readers that it is not a conclusively proven formula but an “initial exploration” to test whether what science is now calling for could be achieved IF society finds the will to mobilize.

IFs don’t come much bigger.

click to enlarge

QUOTES
- Magda Stoczkiewicz, director, Friends of the Earth Europe: “This study proves that it is possible for Europe to deliver its fair share of necessary global emission cuts. A 40% cut by 2020 in Europe is feasible and affordable, and it can be done without resorting to dangerous or unproven solutions. Current political proposals are not ambitious enough - we need a bold shift in policy and determination from European politicians now. The EU can make these cuts in a way which not only improves the quality of life for people in Europe, but also ensures the rights of poorer parts of the world to develop sustainably.”

click to enlarge

- Dr Charles Heaps, report lead author and senior climate/energy scientist, Stockholm Environment Institute: “Our analysis shows that deep cuts in emissions can be achieved in Europe at reasonable cost between now and 2050, even with rather conservative assumptions about technological improvement. The scale and speed of changes required may seem daunting, and indeed it will require a mobilisation of Europe’s economies, but the potential costs of inaction are so large that doing nothing presents a far more implausible and dangerous future pathway for Europe.”

click to enlarge

- From the SEI study: “Even while science is unambiguously telling us that even 2°C of warming would be highly dangerous for our planet, many people are rapidly losing all confidence that we will be able to prevent this level of warming, or even far more. But a climate catastrophe can be averted. Doing so demands political leadership and courageous policy initiatives, both of which go well beyond politics as usual...This report examines how Europe can show such leadership: firstly, by undertaking domestic actions to rapidly reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), and secondly, by fulfilling its international obligations to help other countries address the twin crises of climate change and development…[W]e analyse how Europe can embark on a transition to a low GHG future – enabling it to achieve large emission reductions on a rapid timescale…”